Another "round up" style post I'm afraid, there's really very little I can add to the excellent coverage going on across the internet...

As ever, if you read nothing else, read John Smeaton: Faith schools must promote abortion, Ed Balls confirms

Kate points out that the name of Archbishop Nichols has been dragged in to the debate with Ed Balls suggesting that Archbishop Nichols is in favour of the bill. That was two days ago and still no response from the Archbishop. Qui tacet consentire.

Damian Thompson is equally unimpressed... "Bishop Malcolm McMahon, who holds the education brief in the Bishops’ Conference: not available." "Oona Stannard, head of the Catholic Education Service (CES): not available."

Damian also asks "Archbishop Nichols, tell us: will Catholic schools provide abortion information, as the Government insists?" A question all Bishops will need to ask themselves as they are all ultimately responsible for the schools in their own diocese.

Laurence England asks "Where are they now?" (Bishops McMahon and Nichols that is) while I might ask the same of Bishop Drainey.

Jackie Parkes and Richard Marsden have more on Balls radio appearance this morning.

Fr Ray Blake suggests we should direct more of our ire at the Bishops involved... "There has been serious criticism of the Catholic Education Service, at least on the blogosphere and amongst "thinking" Catholics. Really the criticism should be aimed at Bishop McMahon, and his predecessor Archbishop Nichols, who is responsible for the CES."

For a bit of light relief, read the comments on atheist Free Thinker magazine where they are all terribly dissapointed in Ed Balls saying things like "This is no surprise from our corrupt and lying government; they cravenly give in to the demands of the religious zealots just to chase votes.", they really are deluded.

I have saved the gravest of questions until last: Fr Tim Finegan: Can Catholic schools co-operate in killing babies or not? And I agree with Mullier Fortis: "The Bishops have got to decide whether they wish to follow God or Caesar. To be silent any longer is to cooperate in grave evil."

As many blogs have said already: St John Fisher and St Thomas More, pray for us!

Because that's as much freedom of choice as you're going to get.

This is the Director of Catholic Education Services favourite quote in the world. It's Ed Balls (Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families) speaking in the Houses of Parliament...

The decision to make sex and relationship education statutory is, I think, supported by all political parties, but it is essential that it is taught in line with the ethos, including the faith, of the school. That is clear in the legislation: it is clear that parents as well as school governors will have a say in how the subject is taught, while there is also a parental opt-out, which will apply to pupils until they are 15. I can thus give the hon. Gentleman the complete assurance that the school will be in charge of how to teach SRE, but the fact of teaching it will be in law and guaranteed to all children.

[link]

So, how does he tally that up with this? Here's Ed Balls again...

If their faith has a view in scripture, they can inform pupils of that. What they must not do is teach discrimination. They must be absolutely clear about the importance of civil partnerships

[link]

Must is a pretty strong word. It sort of contradicts his earlier comments about "the school will be in charge".

Then there's another Ed Balls quote...

You can teach the promotion of marriage, you can teach that you shouldn't have sex outside of marriage, what you can't do is deny young people information about contraception outside of marriage."

[link]

Again... strong language... "What you can't do", sort of contradicts "parents as well as school governors will have a say".

Catholic Education Services quotation of the statement that "the school will be in charge of how to teach SRE" is misleading because it gives the impression that schools will be able to choose what to teach when they will not.

But then we look more closely at the first paragraph and we we discover that Mr Balls makes no assurances whatsoever about what may be taught. Only how.

Presumably parents, governors and schools will have the freedom to choose between a Powerpoint Presentation and a DVD?

"They must be absolutely clear about the importance of civil partnerships"

"what you can't do is deny young people information about contraception"

In short. Catholic Schools are going to have no choice about what to teach at all.

We are pleased...

Is there anything they wouldn't be pleased about?

You think I'm joking?

Here's an excerpt from the actual Catholic Education Services press release...

CESEW responds to proposals relating to Sex and Relationships Education and parental rights

Whilst disappointed that legal encumbrances mean that a blanket right of withdrawal can no longer apply, we are pleased that the Government has recognised that the right of withdrawal in formative years is most critical and is therefore providing for the ability of parents to opt-out of SRE up to the age of 15.

CESEW will continue to firmly uphold the position that parental rights remain vital, particularly but not exclusively, in those most formative and critical years up until the age of 15.

[link]

I wonder if Archbishop Nichols has anything to say on the matter?

Thought not.

Parents. Betrayed. Again.